Effective road and traffic management

Written evidence from Stagecoach Group plc (ETM 30)

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Stagecoach Group plc welcomes this opportunity to contribute to the inquiry into Effective Road and Traffic Management and to present evidence to the Transport Committee.

1.2 Effective road and traffic management is a fundamental pre-requisite of an attractive bus service; it is therefore an issue which is very important for all bus operators.

1.3 Our views are given below in response to the questions the Committee has posed.

2.0 Stagecoach Group

2.1 Stagecoach Group has extensive operations in the UK, United States and Canada. The Group employs around 35,000 people and operates bus, coach, rail, and tram services.

2.2 In the UK, our fleet of around 8,400 buses connects communities in more than 100 towns and cities across the country. We have been consistently highly placed in national UK Bus Awards in each of the last four years.

2.3 Two million passengers travel on Stagecoach bus services outside the capital every day, using a network stretching from south-west England to the Highlands of Scotland. We serve major cities, including Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle, Sheffield, Hull, Oxford, Cambridge and Exeter, as well as key shire towns and rural areas. We have also recently re-entered the London bus market with the acquisition of the East London and Selkent bus companies, which run 15% of the capital’s bus services.

2.4 We operate a range of local scheduled services, express coach networks and school bus operations. Most of our services are operated on a commercial basis in a deregulated environment. We also operate contracts on behalf of local authorities and other organisations.

2.5 Since 2006 Stagecoach has invested £398 million in new state-of-the-art buses. This is part of a long-term commitment to improve our environmental performance and ensure all our vehicles are fully accessible to the elderly, disabled and families with young children. As part of our strong commitment to the safety and security of our passengers and our people, all our new vehicles are fitted with digital CCTV systems.

2.6 We also operate express coach services linking major towns within our regional operating company areas including the Oxford Tube connecting London and Oxford at high frequencies 24 hours per day, 365 days per annum. The Group runs the market-leading budget inter-city coach service, megabus.com, which carries over two million passengers a year on a network covering more than 50 locations and the bus/rail integration product, megabusplus.com. Scottish Citylink, our joint venture with ComfortDelGro, is the leading provider of inter-city express coach travel in Scotland.

2.7 Putting customers first is our priority. We continue to focus closely on the recruitment and training of our people, and we have one of the best records of any major operator for vocational training among our frontline drivers and engineers. Our UK Bus division is also a major employer, providing jobs for around 23,000 people at over 110 locations in our 19 regional companies.

2.8 Stagecoach Group is a major rail operator and has an involvement in running almost a quarter of the UK passenger rail network. The Group operates the East Midlands and South Western rail franchises, the latter incorporating the South West Trains and Island Line networks. South West Trains, the UK’s biggest commuter franchise, runs nearly 1,700 trains a day in south-west England out of London Waterloo railway station. In addition, Stagecoach Group has a 49% shareholding in Virgin Rail Group, which operates the West Coast inter-city rail franchise.

2.9 We also operate Supertram, a 28km light rail network incorporating three routes in the city of Sheffield, and have a 10-year contract to operate and maintain the Manchester Metrolink tram network.

2.10 We are committed to investing over £200m in our rail franchises to improve the quality and range of our services. This has included station and car park enhancements, making ticket purchase simpler using smart media and ticket vending machines, depot extensions and rolling stock refurbishment.

2.11 Stagecoach is the largest operator of hybrid buses outside London and also has fleets in Kilmarnock and Cambridge operating on 100% biofuel produced from re-cycled cooking oil. In 2010 the Group was awarded the Carbon Trust Standard for its achievements.

2.12 Stagecoach Group has a five year sustainability strategy designed to reduce carbon emissions across all areas of the business. The £11m programme aims to reduce buildings’ CO2 emissions by 8% and road vehicle emissions by 3% per annum by 2014. To achieve the premises targets the Group is investing in improved management of its energy and water consumption at all its sites and through the appointment of green champions among UK Bus staff, ensuring that wastage and inefficiencies are minimized. Adopting a similar approach, East Midlands Trains has appointed energy wardens and South West Trains is also retrofitting regenerative braking to its Class 458 and Desiro rolling stock and is currently piloting an in-cab train energy management system designed to help drivers to reduce electricity consumption by up to 10%.

2.13 Of particular relevance to this Inquiry is the programme to reduce bus CO2 emissions. All 14000 UK bus drivers are being trained in eco-driving techniques and buses are being fitted with in cab technology to help them deliver the target. While the early year targets are challenging, delivery of subsequent annual targets without the aid of more effective traffic management measures in congested areas may not prove possible.

3.0 The prevalence and impact of traffic congestion and likely future trends

3.1 Internationally, it is generally accepted that the volume of traffic is closely related to the state of a nation’s economy. In times of economic growth traffic volumes rise and so does congestion, unless measures are taken to mitigate the impact. It is therefore very likely that, without intervention to constrain the growth in traffic once economic growth returns, congestion will increase.

3.2. Traffic delay is far more prevalent than is generally acknowledged. In many places, the delays caused by the rising volume of traffic slowly increase and bus operators continually have to adjust their timetables in order to maintain a reliable service. For example, in Manchester the number of buses operated by Stagecoach in 2005 was the same as in 1996. However, the mileage those buses operated was reduced by 10% as services were slowed down to compensate for increasing congestion and more buses were deployed on each service.

3.3 Congestion and delay have a particular adverse impact on bus services, which we endeavour to operate to advertised timetables. This impact is felt in two ways:

a) Bus journeys are delayed, necessitating the lengthening of advertised journey times. This increases the cost of providing the service, which results in higher fares and a slower, less attractive service, which in turn results in fewer intending passengers. It also increases fuel consumption and therefore, harmful emissions.

b) Day to day delay is both variable and unpredictable. This can result in buses having to wait for time en route when delays are less severe. Passengers find this practise irksome, particularly when they wish to complete their journeys in the shortest time possible.

3.4 Apart from the practical difficulties of trying to maintain advertised timetables in congested situations, bus operators can be fined by the Traffic Commissioner for failing to operate a punctual and reliable service. In extremis, the Commissioner can ban an operator from providing services altogether.

4.0 The extent to which the Government and local authorities should intervene to alleviate congestion and the best means of doing so.

4.1 The economic consequences of congestion are currently around £11bn per annum in urban areas. Additionally congestion leads to poor air quality which results in ill health, and has similar costs to society [1] , It is our view that these are compelling reasons for government and local government intervention, particularly in the present economic circumstances.

.4.2. Road vehicle emissions are directly related to fuel consumption and all motor vehicles consume proportionately more fuel at slower average speeds. This is particularly marked in stop start operating conditions, which are an inevitable consequence of queuing traffic.

4.3 While Government, through the Highways Agency, takes responsibility for addressing these problems on the motorway and trunk road networks, it is a matter for local Highway Authorities to deal with in urban areas.

4.4 In urban situations there are only two basic approaches to addressing these issues.

4.5. The first involves reducing the volume of traffic using the congested roads. This can be achieved by a number of measures; e.g. by restricting access, congestion charging, introducing park and ride schemes to encourage transfer to buses or trains, and by limiting the supply and increasing the price of parking spaces at the ultimate destination.

4.6 The second involves improving the flow of traffic on the congested roads. This can be achieved by preventing parking, restricting loading, managing road works effectively and by reducing or re-phasing the number of traffic signals which interrupt traffic flow.

4.7 The appropriate mix of measures which should be adopted will vary from location to location and their introduction needs to be accompanied by improved public transport alternatives. These can be delivered in partnership as the following example shows.

4.8 Stagecoach has worked with the Authorities in Cambridge for the past ten years to provide bus priority and provide attractive local bus services. There are now 5 Park and Ride sites ringing the city offering 5000 spaces to motorists. These now generate over 3.8 million bus trips per annum. The city’s bus service has also been transformed, with the result that twice as many passengers use the local buses now than did so in 2000. Such outcomes require resolve, investment and sustained commitment from all parties.

5.0 The extent to which road user culture and behaviour undermines effective traffic management, including the relevance to today's road users of the Highway Code;

5.1 The most common selfish or unthinking behaviour by road users is the abuse of parking restrictions and indiscriminate parking where no restrictions exist. The prevalence of such behaviour is usually inversely related to the amount of enforcement exercised.

5.2 Knowledge of the Highway Code is a pre-requisite to being a professional driver. It should be required reading for all road users, but most tend to only refer to it when preparing for driving tests. As a consequence, their understanding of more recent signing and regulations is often limited. DVLA should automatically supply a copy of the Highway Code on each occasion a driver renews an expired driving licence photo card, and the licence holder should pay for the publication at cost.

6.0 Intelligent traffic management schemes, such as the scheme which has operated on the M42 and their impact on congestion and journey times.

6.1 Stagecoach understands that the M42 scheme has been successful in increasing the capacity of the road and reducing delays to users, although there has been some criticism of its day to day management [2] . It therefore welcomes such interventions where they are judged to be cost effective investments.

7.0 The effectiveness of legislative provisions for road management under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 and the Traffic Management Act 2004

7.1 Bus operators are invariably the most frequent users of urban road space, with a typical ten minute bus service traversing the same section of highway in both directions over 900 times each week. Stagecoach therefore has a particular interest in the effective application of this legislation.

7.2 So far as we are aware, the provisions to create and manage toll roads in the 1991 Act have only be used once so far; the construction and operation of the M6 Expressway.

7.3 The street works management provisions of the 1991 Act require undertakings to give notice of road works and Authorities some control over their activities. These powers have been strengthened by the Traffic Management Act 2004 which contains a number of important and wide ranging provisions which are designed to deliver more effective road and traffic management.

7.4 We have been unable to establish the number of instances of road works in Great Britain in a typical year, although in Scotland, where there is a Road Works Commissioner, there are approximately 80,000 and in London over half a million [3] . We also understand that there are over 200 utilities with authority to place their services beneath the highway and therefore potentially needing access to them. It is therefore evident that the effective management and control of road works can play a major part in reducing traffic delay.

7.5 The 2004 Act places network management duties on local Highway Authorities requiring them to manage their highways effectively, with specific reference to congestion reduction. They are also required to appoint a Traffic Manager who is charged with identifying the causes of congestion and considering any action which may be taken to address these issues. Further provision is made requiring Authorities to monitor and assess how well they are carrying out their network management duties. The Government may also require information to be provided on Authorities’ network management performance and for intervention and the appointment of an external Traffic Director, in the event that an Authority is judged to be failing in its duties. There has to our knowledge, been no objective assessment of Traffic Managers’ overall performance beyond the reporting of average morning peak vehicle speeds on a number of key corridors. We also understand that the Department of Communities and Local Government is now planning to remove this limited reporting requirement.

7.6 The Act also enables Highway Authorities, upon receipt of government approval, to issue permits allowing them to charge utilities for access to the highway for a specified period with an accompanying financial penalty regime in place for non compliance with the terms of their permit. Regulations to enable such applications were not laid before Parliament until 2007 and Guidance was first issued to Authorities in 2008 and again in November 2010. The first two schemes, (London and Kent), commenced in January 2010 and Kent County Council reports it has been issuing over 30,000 permits each quarter. It also believes that the scheme is resulting in an overall significantly shorter duration of road works. It would appear that a growing number of Authorities are now interested in taking on these powers, which should result in fewer, less disruptive and better coordinated road works.

7.7 In our view, the civil enforcement provisions of the Act are one of its greatest benefits. By 2006, 50% of Authorities had taken advantage of this enactment. Currently, over 85% of Authorities have been granted civil enforcement powers for parking offences. Where this is the case we note that there has been an increase in enforcement activity and consequent improved compliance with parking restrictions in particular. The Act also provides for the enforcement of specified moving traffic offences, but government has yet to lay regulations before Parliament bringing these provisions into effect outside London.

7.8 While the Traffic Management Act 2004 is potentially a powerful piece of legislation in terms of the range of measures which may be implemented to reduce traffic congestion, progress with implementation of its provisions has been frustratingly slow, as identified above.

7.9 We would also suggest that while some Traffic Managers have readily embraced their new duties, overall there is little accountability for their performance in the manner the Act originally intended and therefore no certainty that they are all delivering the best possible outcomes.

8.0 The impact of bus lanes and other aspects of road layout.

8.1 Bus lanes can be an effective means of reducing delay to buses and their passengers. They are most effective where they produce the maximum time saving, which aren’t necessarily the locations where it is easiest to install them. They are one of a package of measures which can be adopted to achieve more reliable and faster bus journey times. Faster bus services are more attractive to passengers, less expensive to operate, enabling lower fares and lower emissions. These factors together encourage more people to use the bus.

8.2 Bus lanes are also a powerful reminder to all road users that the local authority regards its bus network to be an important part of its local transport solution. Provided the capacity at the junction which causes delay to all traffic, is not reduced, then well designed bus priorities should not delay other traffic overall, but merely enable buses to queue jump. For these reasons we deplore the decision of Ministers to remove the M4 bus lane at Heathrow Airport, since it implies that the government sees no value in bus priority.

8.3 There is a tendency to introduce new roundabouts or additional traffic signals at junctions where significant new development takes place and needs access to the main highway. This is often funded by developer contributions. While some form of traffic control is often necessary, the cumulative impact of such measures is to slow through traffic down and increase journey times. Unless compensatory bus priority measures are introduced to enable buses to recover this lost time there is gradual erosion in bus operating efficiency with the same consequences as identified in 3.3, above, particularly where there are a number of new developments along the line of any given bus route.

February 2011